2 nyc cops executed...

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Good to see Townhall keeping their standards. I wonder if Sowell will be part of 2014's biggest political blunders?

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2012/01/03/the_10_biggest_political_debacles_of_2011/page/full

9) Sarah Palin is blamed for Gabrielle Giffords’ shooting. Early this year, Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head by deranged nutjob Jared Loughner. That was a tragedy, but what happened next reached Kanye-West-going-to-an-Occupy-protest levels of irony. Liberals found a map Palin put out several months earlier "targeting" Giffords district. Then, based on absolutely nothing, they concluded Loughner saw the map, took it as a direct order from Palin to kill Giffords, and went on a rampage. The irony here is that by falsely accusing Palin of being directly responsible for the Giffords shooting, her critics did a thousand times more to incite a violent attack on Sarah Palin than Palin had ever done by putting crosshairs on Gifford's district. Plus, as an extra added bonus, we got to hear some of the least civil people in all of politics sanctimoniously lecturing everyone else about the need for civility before they went on over-the-top rants against everyone who disagreed with them. 
Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

labhunter66 Said:
 Did you even read that article?  It basically confirms the reasons I told you.  Grand juries have a tendency to give the benefit of the doubt to the officers and many times the evidence is very weak but the prosecutor doesn't want to appear biased and just not charge so they bring the case the the grand jury and they confirm the evidence isn't sufficient to charge. 

Haha, so reason #2 is magically gone? Do you think all of the 161,989 federal grand jury cases that returned indictments had lock solid evidence?

Again, ham sandwich.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

gst Said:

Quincy I am from the little town of Antler ND and I repeatedly saw reports of protestors calling for dead cops when do we want them right now.

Do you really beleive it is not "speculation" to think this shooter did not see it as well?

Once again please show were I have ever said sharpton called for the killing of cops. You seem to want to continue to infer things that have never been said have been said.

Your inability to connect simple dots shows your lack of understanding of correlation or causation.

Hate to burst your bubble quincy, but if it is choosing between your thoughts  or those of Thomas Sowell on this issue..............................................................................

Yes, it is speculation. I didn't see anything about that until after the shooting. Perhaps you look at sources that would preclude that information being out there. Do you think the shooter looked at the same sources as you?

Feel free to choose Sowell. I disagree with him completely on this issue, and we'll see if Townhall has the gall to call him or themselves out on the hypocrisy.

As for Sharpton, you're correct. The jumbled sentence made me misread "protestors fanned by the flames of sharptons rhetoric calling for dead cops". You need commas in there if you want it read properly. You know "i love fucking college guys" or "I love fucking college, guys"

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Quincy once again I don;t beleive anyone here thinks cops are infallible nor should they be given a pass.

But it is an occupation that is unlike any other despite your efforts to compare it to working in the oil field and most people understand that and as such tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt.

I have had run ins with over zealous law enforcement in the past, but I have also had the priviledge of knowing people who do in fact put on a badge each day to "protect and serve" not knowing what they will face that day.

It is not a job I would want to do so I tend to appreciate those that do and allow them the benefit of the doubt till facts are known.

Remember as you sit with your family this Christmas, there are police officers that are once again putting their life on the line not soley for their pay check, but to truly protect you and yours.


labhunter66's picture
labhunter66
Offline
Joined: 3/7/07

 

Quincy05 Said:

labhunter66 Said:
 Did you even read that article?  It basically confirms the reasons I told you.  Grand juries have a tendency to give the benefit of the doubt to the officers and many times the evidence is very weak but the prosecutor doesn't want to appear biased and just not charge so they bring the case the the grand jury and they confirm the evidence isn't sufficient to charge. 

Haha, so reason #2 is magically gone? Do you think all of the 161,989 federal grand jury cases that returned indictments had lock solid evidence?

Again, ham sandwich.

My point is you cite an article as proof of your theories and that article contradicts you on two of their three points and you just ignore them.  You're delusional and not worth conversing with anymore.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

gst Said:

Quincy I am from the little town of Antler ND and I repeatedly saw reports of protestors calling for dead cops when do we want them right now.

Do you really beleive it is not "speculation" to think this shooter did not see it as well?

Once again please show were I have ever said sharpton called for the killing of cops. You seem to want to continue to infer things that have never been said have been said.

Your inability to connect simple dots shows your lack of understanding of correlation or causation.

Hate to burst your bubble quincy, but if it is choosing between your thoughts  or those of Thomas Sowell on this issue..............................................................................

Here you go, a specific group to blame for moral responsibility.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/23/who-started-new-york-s-dead-cops-chant.html

Not all protestors chanted this and not all protestors agree with them.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

gst Said:
Quincy once again I don;t beleive anyone here thinks cops are infallible nor should they be given a pass.

But it is an occupation that is unlike any other despite your efforts to compare it to working in the oil field and most people understand that and as such tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt.

I have had run ins with over zealous law enforcement in the past, but I have also had the priviledge of knowing people who do in fact put on a badge each day to "protect and serve" not knowing what they will face that day.

It is not a job I would want to do so I tend to appreciate those that do and allow them the benefit of the doubt till facts are known.

Remember as you sit with your family this Christmas, there are police officers that are once again putting their life on the line not soley for their pay check, but to truly protect you and yours.


It's the talk such as this that puts them on a pedastal and makes them infalliable. Cops aren't protecting my by throwing a kid down in a Fargo school. Cops aren't protecting me for arresting a teenager with marijuana. Cops weren't protecting me when they told the lady to delete her pictures after their raid.

You can give cops the benefit of the doubt, just don't make that benefit so large that there is only doubt left. Seems like more and more often people try to find something, anything wrong with the person that dies in order to exonerate the officers that kill. Garner sold untaxed cigarettes, so the officer isn't to blame. Kelly Thomas resisted arrest, so the officers that severely beat him aren't at fault. What about Tamir Rice?  Oh, well his parents had a criminal past and he shouldn't have had a BB gun. Disregarding the non-illegaltiy of it all. John Crawford? Oh, well he shouldn't have been holding a BB gun in Wal Mart that looked like a gun. Ignoring the fact that officers engaged him immediately and the sole reliance on a phony 911 call.

There are too many officers now that have a "use force now, ask forgiveness later" attitude in order to be "safe". Why aren't civilians allowed to be safe when they encounter the police?

Myself, I will give them the same benefit I'll give everyone else from now on.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

labhunter66 Said:
 
My point is you cite an article as proof of your theories and that article contradicts you on two of their three points and you just ignore them.  You're delusional and not worth conversing with anymore.

The article doesn't contradict what I said and I didn't ignore them. If that were the case, you were also contradicted on 2 of 3 points and you ignored them as well. Guess you're just as delusional as I am. Perhaps we can get a group rate on a hospital.

Why didn't you asnwer my question about the 161,989 federal cases that led to indictment? Do you think they had rock solid evidence?

Colt45's picture
Colt45
Offline
Joined: 8/24/12

Quincy05 Said:

Colt45 Said:
Upon further review, you are correct quin, I got it mixed up. To be fair, I had never heard of this case and quickly read through a NY Times article. I didnt assume any crime was committed, the way I read it was that the cops shot an armed man, which apparently wasnt the case. Either way, the dude is dead, killed by a cop, and now the question is if the cop is guilty of homocide or manslaughter, or some crime.

I guess I was trying to understand your position better and why you keep pounding "cops are bad" up everyones arse. In this case, there is a grand jury looking into it and the cop may very well be prosecuted and sentenced, if he committed a crime.  I guess you have already found the cop guilty, so be it. Its just your opinion.
Cops are human, make mistakes just like everyone else. Do you think we are better off without cops?

No I don't think that, I never have. I think we're better off without BAD cops. The keep pounding the issue because everyone seems to think that anti-bad cop means anti-cop. That's completely incorrect. In order for beneficial reform to happen, that fallacy needs to gone and the fallacy of the infalliable cop needs to be gone.

There are so many here that excuse the actions of bad cops based on some narrative that the person "deserved" it because they were resisting arrest, were talking bad, etc. No one deserves to die based on the actions of a cop. Blaming the victim takes away from the actions of the officers that also lead to deaths. Is excessive force needed whenever someone resists? Are all laws major enough that the penalty of death is always there? I would suggest no, but far too many still think in the affirmative.

The more bad cops that are removed from the force, the better it is for everyone. More trust equates to better interactions and, in turn, fewer instances of force against civilians and cops. Isn't that what the end goal should be?

The problem I think most on here have with you is your lukewarm “support” for cops. Your logic implies that “not all cops are bad, and we do need cops, but lets get rid of the bad ones”.  
You minimize the dedication, courage, and professionalism that cops display, day in and day out. You are coming across, at least to me, that good cops are the exception rather than the rule.
You are painting a “bad” image of cops, and most everyone on this site takes exception to the image you are painting.
There are “bad” people in every occupation. There are bad doctors, bad pilots, bad garbage men, …………
It should be obvious that all cops put their lives on the line to protect us. For that they deserve the public’s support, and your support too quin. When you come across as a cop hater, you will be blasted on this site, as you have hopefully learned.
Say something about the “good” cops for a change so everyone can start their healing process………
snow's picture
snow
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/29/03

Hey Jack~

Good thought but this idiot just likes to blab blab blab...He carries on his own convo from top to bottom...

Have a great holiday as well.

Perazzi usa
Benelli usa
Briley Chokes
 

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Colt45 Said:

The problem I think most on here have with you is your lukewarm “support” for cops. Your logic implies that “not all cops are bad, and we do need cops, but lets get rid of the bad ones”.  
You minimize the dedication, courage, and professionalism that cops display, day in and day out. You are coming across, at least to me, that good cops are the exception rather than the rule.
You are painting a “bad” image of cops, and most everyone on this site takes exception to the image you are painting.
There are “bad” people in every occupation. There are bad doctors, bad pilots, bad garbage men, …………
It should be obvious that all cops put their lives on the line to protect us. For that they deserve the public’s support, and your support too quin. When you come across as a cop hater, you will be blasted on this site, as you have hopefully learned.
Say something about the “good” cops for a change so everyone can start their healing process………

Okay, what do I need to do to show my support for good officers? Call for promotions? Already did that earlier this thread. Disavow the shooter? Already did that too. Place irresponsible blame on protestors because of the action of a single deranged individual? That isn't supporting the police.

Where have I said all cops are bad? I've said repeatedly I don't think Wilson should have been charged, don't think any should be killed, and that the ones that are positive should be highly commended. Is it because I attack the ones like the cop that assaulted Garner? Or the one that took down the student in Fargo? Perhaps the fault isn't with me painting them all "bad", but with you guys painting them all "good" and taking issue when I label single ones bad.

Yes, there are bad people in all professions. They get fired, sued, thrown in jail for their maladies.

I have said good things about good cops. You guys are so caught up in your own biases against me, apparently you don't see them.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

snow Said:
Hey Jack~

Good thought but this idiot just likes to blab blab blab...He carries on his own convo from top to bottom...

Have a great holiday as well.

Ah yes, calling someone an idiot because you don't agree. I guess you wear the asshole crown proudly, huh?

Horsager's picture
Horsager
Offline
Joined: 8/12/03

 

Quincy05 Said:

snow Said:
Hey Jack~

Good thought but this idiot just likes to blab blab blab...He carries on his own convo from top to bottom...

Have a great holiday as well.

Ah yes, calling someone an idiot because you don't agree. I guess you wear the asshole crown proudly, huh?

Well, in post #158 of this thread which is near the bottom of pg. 8, you called the Grand Jury cases BS because you didn't agree with their outcomes.  It's not like you were in the courtroom and know what information was presented, or how it was presented.  There aren't any video or written transcripts of the case out and available to the public yet.

Just so we're clear here.  You're saying that if you don't agree with something it's fair for you to label it as BS.   But, if someone doesn't agree with you they're an A-hole?  That doesn't seem like a very enlightened position to me.

This moment is a paradox, it's the oldest you've ever been as well as the youngest you'll ever be.



gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Quincy05 Said:

gst Said:
Quincy once again I don;t beleive anyone here thinks cops are infallible nor should they be given a pass.

But it is an occupation that is unlike any other despite your efforts to compare it to working in the oil field and most people understand that and as such tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt.

I have had run ins with over zealous law enforcement in the past, but I have also had the priviledge of knowing people who do in fact put on a badge each day to "protect and serve" not knowing what they will face that day.

It is not a job I would want to do so I tend to appreciate those that do and allow them the benefit of the doubt till facts are known.

Remember as you sit with your family this Christmas, there are police officers that are once again putting their life on the line not soley for their pay check, but to truly protect you and yours.

It's the talk such as this that puts them on a pedastal and makes them infalliable. Cops aren't protecting my by throwing a kid down in a Fargo school. Cops aren't protecting me for arresting a teenager with marijuana. Cops weren't protecting me when they told the lady to delete her pictures after their raid.

You can give cops the benefit of the doubt, just don't make that benefit so large that there is only doubt left. Seems like more and more often people try to find something, anything wrong with the person that dies in order to exonerate the officers that kill. Garner sold untaxed cigarettes, so the officer isn't to blame. Kelly Thomas resisted arrest, so the officers that severely beat him aren't at fault. What about Tamir Rice?  Oh, well his parents had a criminal past and he shouldn't have had a BB gun. Disregarding the non-illegaltiy of it all. John Crawford? Oh, well he shouldn't have been holding a BB gun in Wal Mart that looked like a gun. Ignoring the fact that officers engaged him immediately and the sole reliance on a phony 911 call.

There are too many officers now that have a "use force now, ask forgiveness later" attitude in order to be "safe". Why aren't civilians allowed to be safe when they encounter the police?

Myself, I will give them the same benefit I'll give everyone else from now on.

Bullshit, it is called respect.

All you have done in this thread quincy is "speculate".

On what happened, on what people think.................................

You are "speculating" on whether the cops actions in Fargo may indeed cause a kid to stop and think about what happened have a wake up call and maybe someday NOT make a choice to rape someones daughter or rob someones store.
Protecting you directly, maybe not, but try not to "speculate" on what may be the ultimate end result of the officers actions.

Have a Merry Christmas quincy and take a step back and give it some thought.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Horsager Said:
Well, in post #158 of this thread which is near the bottom of pg. 8, you called the Grand Jury cases BS because you didn't agree with their outcomes.  It's not like you were in the courtroom and know what information was presented, or how it was presented.  There aren't any video or written transcripts of the case out and available to the public yet.

Just so we're clear here.  You're saying that if you don't agree with something it's fair for you to label it as BS.   But, if someone doesn't agree with you they're an A-hole?  That doesn't seem like a very enlightened position to me.

They were BS and I laid out my reasonings as to why I thought that. I still think Wilson was probably justified, but the matter should have gone to court. The prosecutor didn't need to do the job of the defense like he did. How often do you hear the defendant testifying at the grand jury? Less than 10% maybe?

Nothing available to the public? The video of the altercation is available to the public. As are the initial testimonies of the officers. It's not like the public is completely blind in this case.

If the process isn't the same as it is with civilians, then something isn't quite fair, eh? And if someone calls me an idiot for disagreeing, odds are they are an asshole. He doesn't need to agree with me, he just should not be an asshole about it. Capiche?

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
No, I haven't put on a badge, but I have interacted with police.

I had already guessed you had interacted with police.  It's very evident you hate police, so I am guessing your interaction was as a perp.  People don't carry on about hating police unless they have had a bad experience.  There is always a reason people don't like police.  Nine times out of ten it's because they are on the other side of the law.

I'm amazed you think you know more than the grand juries in these cases.   I don't think anyone is as impressed with you as you are with yourself.  I hope your bs cop hating doesn't influence some nut job into thinking another pig with wings is a good idea.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Plainsman Said:
I had already guessed you had interacted with police.  It's very evident you hate police, so I am guessing your interaction was as a perp.  People don't carry on about hating police unless they have had a bad experience.  There is always a reason people don't like police.  Nine times out of ten it's because they are on the other side of the law.

I'm amazed you think you know more than the grand juries in these cases.   I don't think anyone is as impressed with you as you are with yourself.  I hope your bs cop hating doesn't influence some nut job into thinking another pig with wings is a good idea.

How about you ask questions instead of constantly using your bias to frame who I am. I've had interactions as a "perp" and as a civilian, probably like 95% of everyone else on here.

People don't need to have a bad experience to want reform. People just need to open their eyes to the abuses that happen and the protections in place that don't allow reform. If you think that equates to "hate", that's your issue, not mine. I "hate" the police because of bad cops about as much as I hate hospitals because of bad doctors... not much.

I hope you BS cop loving doesn't influence some nut job to abuse the rights of some innocent civilian.

As for impressions, I really don't care. You guys illustrate frequently the type of impression you have when someone disagrees with you. I'm glad I don't have that type of impression.

Side note: do you hate farmers? Do you think someone would use your influence for your hatred of farmers to do damage against them? Or do you acknowledge the shortfalls in agrculture politics and wish to reform it?

Horsager's picture
Horsager
Offline
Joined: 8/12/03

 

Quincy05 Said:

Horsager Said:
Well, in post #158 of this thread which is near the bottom of pg. 8, you called the Grand Jury cases BS because you didn't agree with their outcomes.  It's not like you were in the courtroom and know what information was presented, or how it was presented.  There aren't any video or written transcripts of the case out and available to the public yet.

Just so we're clear here.  You're saying that if you don't agree with something it's fair for you to label it as BS.   But, if someone doesn't agree with you they're an A-hole?  That doesn't seem like a very enlightened position to me.

They were BS and I laid out my reasonings as to why I thought that.

Therein lies the rub.  You don't know.  You weren't there.  You don't have any relevant information regarding video or transcripts of the proceedings.  You're disagreeing based on emotion, not facts.

Decisions rooted in emotion and not facts all too often leave their owner in an untenable position.  Isolated in their belief that their opinions/thoughts/beliefs are the sum-total of what can be true.  It would not surprise me to learn that you spend an inordinate amount of time wondering why that independent of the group you find yourself surrounded by, everyone else is always so wrong.

This moment is a paradox, it's the oldest you've ever been as well as the youngest you'll ever be.



Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Wanting to get rid of bad politicians doesn't mean you hate legislatures. Wanting to be rid of bad doctors doesn't mean you hate medical services. Wanting to get rid of a broken swing doesn't mean you hate parks. Getting rid of bad cops doesn't mean I hate police.

Now that that is out of the way, you guys don't need to say it so much.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Horsager Said:
Therein lies the rub.  You don't know.  You weren't there.  You don't have any relevant information regarding video or transcripts of the proceedings.  You're disagreeing based on emotion, not facts.

Decisions rooted in emotion and not facts all too often leave their owner in an untenable position.  Isolated in their belief that their opinions/thoughts/beliefs are the sum-total of what can be true.  It would not surprise me to learn that you spend an inordinate amount of time wondering why that independent of the group you find yourself surrounded by, everyone else is always so wrong.

Herein lies the rub, the arguments I laid forth don't preclude the necessity of me being there. I made no specific argument for each case that would result in the requirement of me being on the jury. I think the entire grand jury system is rigged in favor of police. Hence, the actions of the prosecutors and the results of the grand juries were incorrect.

Decisions rooted in emotion are what entails folks like you to say that cops aren't safe. They allow folks like you to lay blame on protestors and reformers like myself. They allow folks like you to use buzz words like "cop hater" in order to diminish the argument in favor of reform. Do you think those are all objective based narratives? Hell no. I have already shown, that OBJECTIVELY, police officers are indicted at such a different rate that there is no way one of those systems is fair to the defendent and the accused.

Have you ever thought about the group you surround yourself with, and perhaps they aren't "everyone else" as you may think?

 
Seems according to this poll from 2002, the majorities favored reforms:
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=466&issue_id=122004

Perhaps you should expand your group to figure out why other demographics disagree with you:
http://reason.com/poll/2014/10/24/who-really-likes-the-police-older-richer

Horsager's picture
Horsager
Offline
Joined: 8/12/03

 

Quincy05 Said:

Wanting to get rid of bad politicians doesn't mean you hate legislatures. Wanting to be rid of bad doctors doesn't mean you hate medical services. Wanting to get rid of a broken swing doesn't mean you hate parks. Getting rid of bad cops doesn't mean I hate police.

Now that that is out of the way, you guys don't need to say it so much.

"Wanting" is emotion, not factual and not necessity.  

It is very thoughtful of you to codify your emotions for the rest of the readership here though.

This moment is a paradox, it's the oldest you've ever been as well as the youngest you'll ever be.



Colt45's picture
Colt45
Offline
Joined: 8/24/12

Quincy05 Said:

Colt45 Said:

The problem I think most on here have with you is your lukewarm “support” for cops. Your logic implies that “not all cops are bad, and we do need cops, but lets get rid of the bad ones”.  
You minimize the dedication, courage, and professionalism that cops display, day in and day out. You are coming across, at least to me, that good cops are the exception rather than the rule.
You are painting a “bad” image of cops, and most everyone on this site takes exception to the image you are painting.
There are “bad” people in every occupation. There are bad doctors, bad pilots, bad garbage men, …………
It should be obvious that all cops put their lives on the line to protect us. For that they deserve the public’s support, and your support too quin. When you come across as a cop hater, you will be blasted on this site, as you have hopefully learned.
Say something about the “good” cops for a change so everyone can start their healing process………

Okay, what do I need to do to show my support for good officers? Call for promotions? Already did that earlier this thread. Disavow the shooter? Already did that too. Place irresponsible blame on protestors because of the action of a single deranged individual? That isn't supporting the police.

Where have I said all cops are bad? I've said repeatedly I don't think Wilson should have been charged, don't think any should be killed, and that the ones that are positive should be highly commended. Is it because I attack the ones like the cop that assaulted Garner? Or the one that took down the student in Fargo? Perhaps the fault isn't with me painting them all "bad", but with you guys painting them all "good" and taking issue when I label single ones bad.

Yes, there are bad people in all professions. They get fired, sued, thrown in jail for their maladies.

I have said good things about good cops. You guys are so caught up in your own biases against me, apparently you don't see them.

You can spin what you have said on this and previous threads all you want. Even if you arent a cop hater, most on this site think you are. Its an impression they have formed based on YOUR comments. If you arent a cop hater, then I guess you havent communicated that very effectively, cause I bet if I was to take a FBO poll, you would overwhelmingly be labeled as a cop hater. Everyone cant be wrong. So either wise up and change your tone, or keep piling it on. Nobody is taking your side, as far as I can tell.

So, just lighten up a little, we all get you want "reform" and that there are "bad" cops out there. There are bad doctors too that screw up operations and unintentionally kill people. Why arent we rallying for "doctor" reforms? Nobody wants a rogue cop on the loose, nobody wants a drunk driver on  the road, nobody wants a drunk  pilot to fly a plane, etc...... but guess what! It  happens!
Its just a fact of life, cops screw up. But at the end of the day, we need to be thankful there are people willing to serve and protect, and they deserve respect.I think everyoje would agree cops do way more good than bad.  They dont deserve to be vilified and hated and disrespected.  So just show the cops a little respect, thats all we want.  And keep the cop judging in the courts where it belongs.
Chill out!

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Horsager Said:
 "Wanting" is emotion, not factual and not necessity.  

It is very thoughtful of you to codify your emotions for the rest of the readership here though.

Hahaha, this is really the route you are going? One can't want reform because "want" is emotion? This is disregarding that "want" is actually agnostic in terms of subjective and objective (nice try).

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
Wanting to get rid of bad politicians doesn't mean you hate legislatures.

I agree

Wanting to be rid of bad doctors doesn't mean you hate medical services.
 

I agree

Side note: do you hate farmers? Do you think someone would use your influence for your hatred of farmers to do damage against them? Or do you acknowledge the shortfalls in agrculture politics and wish to reform it?

The later, but you may get someone on your side with the distraction. 

   Wanting to get rid of a broken swing doesn't mean you hate parks.

Yada yada yada we get the point.

Getting rid of bad cops doesn't mean I hate police.

I agree, you just have no idea if the cops were talking about are good or bad.  The grand jury knew, but you decide their bad with no evidence.  Put the keyboard down and make some more license plates.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Colt45 Said:
You can spin what you have said on this and previous threads all you want. Even if you arent a cop hater, most on this site think you are. Its an impression they have formed based on YOUR comments. If you arent a cop hater, then I guess you havent communicated that very effectively, cause I bet if I was to take a FBO poll, you would overwhelmingly be labeled as a cop hater. Everyone cant be wrong. So either wise up and change your tone, or keep piling it on. Nobody is taking your side, as far as I can tell.

So, just lighten up a little, we all get you want "reform" and that there are "bad" cops out there. There are bad doctors too that screw up operations and unintentionally kill people. Why arent we rallying for "doctor" reforms? Nobody wants a rogue cop on the loose, nobody wants a drunk driver on  the road, nobody wants a drunk  pilot to fly a plane, etc...... but guess what! It  happens!
Its just a fact of life, cops screw up. But at the end of the day, we need to be thankful there are people willing to serve and protect, and they deserve respect.I think everyoje would agree cops do way more good than bad.  They dont deserve to be vilified and hated and disrespected.  So just show the cops a little respect, thats all we want.  And keep the cop judging in the courts where it belongs.
Chill out!

I'm not spinning anything. I've said the same stuff the entire time. I don't care what most on this site think. Clearly the "jump to conclusions" mat runs rampant around here. Just because the rampant "cop lover" bias runs so vast here, doesn't mean the poll would be correct. You guys are so hell bent on personally attacking me that you completely disregard what I actually say, throw out excuses as why to ignore me (I don't say enough positive things), or flat out insult. Forgive me if I take your accusations as to what I am with a grain of salt. If you think no one has taken my side, you haven't read the thread enough. ;)

Why aren't we rallying around doctor reforms? When was the last time you heard of a doctor that had a malpractice suit against them either keep their job or not be disbarred? There are failsafes instituted against doctors that police and their unions have ensured don't exist. Look into the number of cases in which an officer gets reprimanded and fired and then gets another job in a new city. How many doctors does that happen to?

Yes, "it happens", but it seems to be happening much more with officers currently and there is much more of a defense of those officers by the unions and some in the public. http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/30/lawsuit-capitol-police-officers-keep-jobs-after-duis-anthrax-hoax/

Yes, a fact of life indicates that people in general may "screw up". But most times if those screw ups happen to end in a loss of life, people don't keep their jobs and get paid admin leave. As I told someone else. Yes, people screwing up is a problem, cops screwing up is a problem, but the latter is a state sponsored problem, and that is what we should worry about the most.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Plainsman Said:
I agree, you just have no idea if the cops were talking about are good or bad.  The grand jury knew, but you decide their bad with no evidence.  Put the keyboard down and make some more license plates.

So the cop that was involved with Garner, good or bad? Was he bad when he assaulted the two black guys last year, but he's good now after accosting Garner? Where is the line?

The grand jury isn't told of their history. They are limited to the facts of the case. That doesn't indicate if a cop is generally bad or good.

Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Plainsman Said
Put the keyboard down and make some more license plates.

So I'm a criminal now? Good lord guys...

Horsager's picture
Horsager
Offline
Joined: 8/12/03

 

Quincy05 Said:

Horsager Said:
Therein lies the rub.  You don't know.  You weren't there.  You don't have any relevant information regarding video or transcripts of the proceedings.  You're disagreeing based on emotion, not facts.

Decisions rooted in emotion and not facts all too often leave their owner in an untenable position.  Isolated in their belief that their opinions/thoughts/beliefs are the sum-total of what can be true.  It would not surprise me to learn that you spend an inordinate amount of time wondering why that independent of the group you find yourself surrounded by, everyone else is always so wrong.

Decisions rooted in emotion are what entails folks like you to say that cops aren't safe. 

I didn't say that.


Quincy05 Said:
Decisions rooted in emotion allow folks like you to lay blame on protestors and reformers like myself. 

I didn't do that.


Quincy05 Said:

Decisions rooted in emotion allow folks like you to use buzz words like "cop hater" in order to diminish the argument in favor of reform.

I didn't do that either.

Jeepers, it seems like you're trying to blame me for things I haven't said lump me into a group in which I don't belong.  You're emotions must be getting the better of you because you're sure not allowing facts to get in the way.

This moment is a paradox, it's the oldest you've ever been as well as the youngest you'll ever be.



Quincy05's picture
Quincy05
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 6/8/09

Colt45 Said:
So just show the cops a little respect, thats all we want. And keep the cop judging in the courts where it belongs.

Why don't you show the protestors respect? Cops don't need my respect. I don't work for them. On the contrary, they work for the people, I am included in this, so they should be treating the people with respect. Not assuming everyone is out to get them.

Why should cop judging be limited to courts? Do you think all department policies are backed by law? Um, they aren't.

Jiffy.'s picture
Jiffy.
Offline
Joined: 7/26/12

 I can tell Christmas vacation is on for the kiddies.....

 

Pages